Wedgebuster

Lots of good stuff here, every situation is unique. The key is getting decision makers in those districts to read their own situation, and then make the decisions that help engage students in those districts. Getting kids to be active, take pride in their school and community, learn sacrifice and teamwork is only going to benefit these schools academically in the long run. Your 3rd point about Admin hiring coaches is a tough one. I'm right with you, but teacher shortage is making that harder and harder. Why can't every Administrator be given a list of district needs (teachers, coaches, directors, club sponsers, etc) and be given the marching orders by the Superintendent to cross off as many of those needs with each hire as possible? Wouldn't that mentality bring the greatest value to the school with each open teaching position?

It seems that sometimes very rural schools struggle at athletics because kids live so far apart and there is no park or centralized place of pick-up games. I've taught in a town with a park, and kids were always down there shooting hoops, throwing a football, playing soccer. Kids there talked sports. They came into your room in the morning saying things like "Did you watch that game last night? Why the heck did they not take a timeout in that situation!?" I've also taught in a very rural district. Kids literally had trouble getting together to play with other kids because they were all 5+ miles apart from their buddies. Kids there didn't talk sports. It was exhaust systems on their truck, church youth group stuff, etc.

Both are consistently good due to extremely high participation rates, excellent coaching, and great program alignment grade school to high school. I can see where if two smaller schools can't support those things individually, but by combining their resources could do so, that a bigger combined school might be an answer. It does sadden me that some look at that as the first option, rather than putting things in place that might lead to better participation, better coaching, better program alignment at both smaller schools and therefore a higher number of kids overall benefiting from playing high school sports.

Going to play a little Devil's advocate here........does anyone else worry about kids having less opportunities for involvement in this model? 44 starters in 2 football playing schools gets cut to 22. 10 basketball spots to 5, 28 wrestling slots to 14. What is the positive trade-off that comes with this move towards fewer teams? Is the thought that Elkhart or other like schools couldn't successfully support 2 smaller programs in each sport but with their combined resources they could support 1 program at an accelerated level of competition?

The football fans that don't understand how certain styles of play don't fit into certain scenarios/situations baffles me. Throwing the football is one of the most difficult things in sports. Many spend Monday's arguing how the QB of their favorite NFL team sucks but then then sit in the stands on a Friday night yelling "throw the ball!" High School football in most communities involves kids that play other sports, you get 6-9 hours of practice time with these kids a week (not 22 like the college game). So unless your going to monopolize the time of a lot of kids outside of the fall (remember their is a lot of skill involved in pass protection too, think of what NFL tackles get paid) throwing the football consistently at the HS level becomes a tall task. A lot of the schools that are utilizing a run heavy offense are trying to narrow the talent gap between them and their opponent. Army, Navy, and Air Force have long been competitive running the Triple Option with what amounts to D2 and D3 talent at the D1 level. If those teams lined up in the spread it would get really ugly for them very quickly. When they do what they do we've seen them win big games (Navy vs ND) and push other D1 schools to the brink (Army vs Oklahoma, Army vs Michigan). Yet we often see the fan in the stands at schools that are trying to use the precision and aggression of their ground and pound offense to win a similar way that the academies do, yelling to throw the ball and then posting on sites like this about how "dumb" or "unimaginative" the offense is. They have no idea how wide the gap would be in those games if that running team were to try to jump into a 4 or 5 wide shotgun formation. If you can get past all that, and you still want to throw the ball, have fun finding a coaching staff in 2021 to coach everything that you need to with the deep understanding that it takes to be elite in the spread. You need a Qb Coach, a RB coach, OL Coach, TE Coach, Receivers Coach, and that is at minimum. AND they all need to have a deep understanding of how all the parts fit together (while working their 9-5 jobs or teaching their classes). In the Straight T you can function with an OL coach (better with 2), TE Coach, and Backfield Coach. Really limits the number of people you need to have that really know whats going on. Does throwing the football have a place in HS football? Absolutely. BUT the situation has to be right for it to go well. I suppose we will never open the eyes of some Monday morning Qbs, but all that know enough, know exactly what coaches like Coach Sharpe are attempting to accomplish offensively.

Huge loss, Coach W seemed like a huge mover of the needle at Northridge.

Always a difficult and awkward scenario. Some Admin teams seem to handle it flawlessly and other times it seem to get messy.

Does this make it harder to hire the next coach? You would think that S&C job is what a lot of football coaches would be interested in.

Games with names are undoubtedly the BEST!

Is there any precedence for a "this sport only" conference?

Is it travelling distance or is it schools trying to justify kids getting home so late at night for a JV tennis match on a Tuesday?

Wasn't Pike's Coach assigned something like "K-12 Physical Education and Athletic Development Coordinator"? Essentially like a "Math Coach" or "Writing Coach" position that you see at some schools. A former teacher who now instructs the teachers of the district how to teach those subjects more effectively.

What is the correct call here?

That's true that raises are negotiated but when I left Indiana teacher raises could only be negotiated from "New Money" and with the bulk of funding being linked to enrollment, effectively you had to be in a growing district to have a chance at a raise. Has that changed? What is the Teacher Appreciation Grant? Is this less than a few years old?

What is the coaching salary at a Mt. Vernon or New Pal like compared to Warren or BD? The formula for how teacher raises are tied to student enrolled is probably more important. If you're a teacher and not at the top of the pay scale, the only place to be is in a growing school district. How some of these young teacher coaches keep making it work at schools where enrollment is stagnant or heading in the wrong direction beats me. Imagine being hired in at $34K then being told that the only way to increase your salary is if enrollment increases and "New Funds" become available.

THIS! Grover hit it on the head. A private school that has 650 kids legitimately pulls athletes from that full number. Public of the same size often has 250 of those kids "eliminated" by socioeconomic reason, home life reason, general apathy, etc. Just an acknowledgement that we aren't comparing apples to apples here, and shouldn't be trying to would go a long way. How many "GREAT" Indiana football coaches made their names at private schools before moving on to a select public school job? How many times has it been done the other way around?

I would like to hear DT's ideas on just how a school could make this "decision". I've read enough of his thoughts on the general investment that schools must make in football to be winners year in and year out. I would love to hear some of our thoughtful posters ideas on just how this "decision" can be "made" by a school system.

Do you agree with that logic TigerFan?

My question is why is it that way? If two teams have the same record and one won the head to head match-up, what's the argument for having co-champs? That the loser of the head to head beat another team that beat the team that beat them?

Am I correct in thinking that for some reason head to head doesn't matter in conference title races? 6-1 is 6-1 even if you won the head to head match up? If that is the case, is that the way that is SHOULD be? Lets hear some arguments on either side.

That Punch 😳 .....the finish 🤩

I would think that many an Indiana HS would really like that coaching record leading their program, BUT....I do appreciate you trying to drive conversation. I just don't see it happening with Coach Barron. Will he move on from Plymouth? Definitely has the resume to go and get a job. Where would he be a good fit?

The idea that a coach would be on the "hot seat" after playing a very good New Prairie team to a 1 TD game in the Sectional Championship game, THE YEAR BEFORE! is somewhat ridiculous to me.

I'm up here in Michigan with all of our own "interesting" ways of dealing with this virus. Can someone tell me what the definition of a "Covid Contact" is in athletics. The line from the governor's office up here is that in regular everyday life its "15 minutes of being within 6 feet or less". Well that literally never happens in a football game, even if you add up all the time of O and D-line contact in a game its not 15 minutes. Yet your seeing entire programs shutdown over 1-2 cases. Contact tracing......I get it, but what is their metric for a "contact"?

Did anyone see Ohio's plan of shuffling sports seasons around to play the sports with more built in "social distance" first? Fall: Boys and Girls Tennis, Boys and Girls Golf, Softball, Baseball, Boys and Girls Track, Winter: Normal Spring: Football (start season March 1, regular season begins March 22, Playoffs start in lat May) Soccer An out of the box plan, but I would take it to be able to let all the kids play!